[Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

[Huw Lloyd]

Hi Phillip,

Bell makes similar distinctions to Mill, except where Mill focuses upon the
cultural diffusion of universities, Bell looks to culture itself. Mill
compares impoverished English universities of the time with (supposedly)
enriched continental universities (Europe), Bell compares cultures, with
specific interest in the carriers of the flame of civilization (more life
of ideas rather than well-orderliness).  The distinction that Bell draws is
that the empirical nation of England (these are not my nation categories!)
forces anyone with a creative passion towards individuation from his peers,
which is in contrast towards a more harmonious existence in cultured
environments.

Best,
Huw

On 27 November 2016 at 21:43, White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
wrote:

> surprised me, Huw, that Clive Bell wrote about civilisation.  i only
> associate him with aesthetics in art - in fact, read his first book, Art,
> which i could barely slog through.  he has, to me, that arch Edwardian
> English voice that has such an impeachable sense of surety that i'm always
> astonished by.  of course, Trump has that self-same sense, without the
> intelligence or wit of an Edwardian.  Bell's notion that art is somehow
> apart from time, context or culture is a platonic leap that i've never been
> able to comprehend.
>
>
> phillip
>
> ________________________________
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2016 3:33:02 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
>
> Thanks Phillip, that put's Clive Bell's "Civilization" into more historical
> context.
>
> On 26 November 2016 at 00:18, White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > John Stuart Mill notes the "empty husks" of education prevalent at the
> > time (1836), that have come down through the ages.  here's his solutions:
> >
> >
> > https://www.laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/
> > civilization/civilization.s06.html
> >
> > CIVILIZATION Section 6, John Stuart Mill, Civilization<https://www.
> > laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/civilization/
> > civilization.s06.html>
> > www.laits.utexas.edu<http://www.laits.utexas.edu>
> > Civilization John Stuart Mill Section 6 [Improving British education]
> > These things must bide their time. But the other of the two great
> > desiderata, the regeneration ...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > dense, but illuminating one hundred and eighty years later.
> >
> >
> > phillip
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> > on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 5:02:34 PM
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
> >
> > Thanks Andy.
> >
> > On 25 November 2016 at 23:38, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
> >
> > > This is not a one-off event, Huw. I writing his PhD Dissertation on the
> > > philosophy of Nature of Democritus and Epicurus he was taking a
> position
> > > opposite to that of Hegel. The dissertation was published in 1841 when
> > Marx
> > > was aged 22. He credits Feuerbach with the impulse to take a stronger
> > > materialist line against Hegel with the publication of the Essence of
> > > Christianity in 1841. His notes on Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843)
> > show
> > > that he was trying to take a dismissive attitude to Hegel, and it is
> only
> > > in the Theses on Feuerbach and The German Ideology of 1845 where the
> > > outlines of Marx's distinctive critique of Hegel are clearly present,
> as
> > > David notes, in the form of a critique of Feuerbach. It is reasonable
> to
> > > suppose that he was working out this position at the time he wrote the
> > 1844
> > > Manuscripts. However, he is still working on how to use Hegel as he
> > writes
> > > his Political Economy material in 1857-58, after which his position is
> > > pretty settled. However, his turn to Hegel in 1881 to understand
> > calculus,
> > > only 2 years before his death, demonstrate that this was an unfinished
> > task.
> > >
> > > Andy
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Andy Blunden
> > > http://home.mira.net/~andy
> > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
> > > On 26/11/2016 2:58 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote:
> > >
> > >> ...
> > >>
> > >> Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to
> > >> something I'm currently drafting.  Does anyone know when Marx
> > specifically
> > >> studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic?
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >> Huw
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>